Originally posted by: Jugernot
I support the way in Iraq, but I think 911 was just an excuse for W to get revenge for Saddam trying to kill his daddy.
Originally posted by: Jugernot
I support the way in Iraq, but I think 911 was just an excuse for W to get revenge for Saddam trying to kill his daddy.
Originally posted by: Syringer
Originally posted by: Jugernot
I support the way in Iraq, but I think 911 was just an excuse for W to get revenge for Saddam trying to kill his daddy.
And ironically the country housing those responsible for 911, Saudi Arabia, are still our good allies as well as a leading oil supplier.
Can anyone explain still how this war is not about oil?
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Reason.
Whether you believe he has ties to Bin Laden is irrelevant, although I don't think there's any doubt.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Reason.
Remember, Bush said we are going to wipe out ALL terrorism. That means not just the people responsible for 9/11. Saddam is a sponsor of terrorism, too, this is well-documented.
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Reason.
Whether you believe he has ties to Bin Laden is irrelevant, although I don't think there's any doubt.
What makes you think that? Anything other than Bush's assertions?
Bogus. Not even close to the same thing. Israel does nothing but RESPOND to terrorism......they don't have people all over the world blowing stuff up.Originally posted by: Syringer
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Reason.
Remember, Bush said we are going to wipe out ALL terrorism. That means not just the people responsible for 9/11. Saddam is a sponsor of terrorism, too, this is well-documented.
So are we, and that is well-documented.
We support Israel, and don't directly condone their actions but we are still responsible for it, and through oil to terrorist countries.
I pity those poor souls who automatically assume the government is lying to them, especially when the current government isn't the party they support.
Originally posted by: Syringer
I pity those poor souls who automatically assume the government is lying to them, especially when the current government isn't the party they support.
Yup, and Clinton really didn't "have relations with Monica".
And Nixon had never heard of Watergate.
And on and on and on..
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Reason.
Whether you believe he has ties to Bin Laden is irrelevant, although I don't think there's any doubt.
What makes you think that? Anything other than Bush's assertions?
Let's see....I think there was an Al Quaeda higher-up that went to Iraq to get patched up after being wounded by us.
Then there's that matter of an Iraqi official meeting in Europe with someone from Al Quaeda, (wasn't is Mr. Atta?)
Where there's smoke, there's fire, and I don't think anyone is denying these reports.
Also, yes, Bush's word that they are connected is good enough for me. I pity those poor souls who automatically assume the government is lying to them, especially when the current government isn't the party they support.
Bottom line here is this: Saddam has a long, long history of lying. It's documented and not debatable. Anyone who says different is a complete idiot and I'm surprised they have enough brain power for even basic functions like keeping their heart beating and breathing.
Bush, whether you like him or not, has proven to be a pretty honorable man. He does, or is trying to do pretty much everything he said he would when campaigning.
It comes down to this: who do you believe more? Saddam when he says he doesn't have WMD's, or Bush when he says Saddam does?
If you believe Saddam, then as far as I'm concerned, you can go straight to hell.
Then again, that's just my opinion.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Bogus. Not even close to the same thing. Israel does nothing but RESPOND to terrorism......they don't have people all over the world blowing stuff up.
And yes, if we buy oil from certain Middle East countries, I suppose you could say we indirectly sponsor terrorism, although that's a stretch and it isn't directly sponsoring it.
Saddam DIRECTLY sponsors terrorism. He murders his own people.
He most certainly has WMD's, and if you believe different, you're an idiot.
He is a threat, and this war on terrorism is about removing the threats. That's THREATS, as in plural. He's just one of many. North Korea is next, and there might be another Middle Eastern country or two that gets a taste of what we think of terrorists if some things don't change.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Originally posted by: Syringer
I pity those poor souls who automatically assume the government is lying to them, especially when the current government isn't the party they support.
Yup, and Clinton really didn't "have relations with Monica".
And Nixon had never heard of Watergate.
And on and on and on..
That was then. That was Clinton. Bush ain't Clinton or Nixon, thankfully. He has shown himself to be nothing but honorable so far, and neither you nor I have any reason to doubt him yet. And the people saying Clinton was lying were just A BIT more credible than Saddam, don't you think?
Plus, you still have that old, "either you believe Bush or you believe Saddam" thing, and there really isn't any middle ground. If you say you don't believe Bush, than you might as well say you believe Saddam, it's the exact same thing.
That was then. That was Clinton. Bush ain't Clinton or Nixon, thankfully. He has shown himself to be nothing but honorable so far, and neither you nor I have any reason to doubt him yet. And the people saying Clinton was lying were just A BIT more credible than Saddam, don't you think?
Plus, you still have that old, "either you believe Bush or you believe Saddam" thing, and there really isn't any middle ground. If you say you don't believe Bush, than you might as well say you believe Saddam, it's the exact same thing.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
I really don't care what Europeans believe. All of history is about Europe being conquered and in turn liberated by one country or another.
Many of these wars were lost by people who believed the same thing about others that they do about the US today. The difference is, we aren't conquerors. We are liberators. We are not going to live in fear of terrorism. We are going to do something about it.
Furthermore, I don't think that the majority of Europeans believe that about the US.
France and Germany about 2 of Iraq's biggest trade partners.....THAT is why they don't want to go to war until THEY think it's necessary....if you want to believe something about governments lying, THAT is where you need to start looking. Just follow the money.
Seems like I heard France is responsible for about 25% of Iraq's foreign trade.
Oh, and we don't murder our own people like Saddam. I'm sure the government's hands aren't totally clean as far as the past is concerned, but you can't compare what Saddam has done to his own people to ANYTHING the US has EVER done.
As far as undeniable proof that Saddam has WMD's, I think you're going to see it pretty soon. Then you'll know that Bush was telling the truth all along, like he has so far.
I, nor you, have no reason to doubt him yet. If W says Saddam has them, I say, go get him.
Now if Clinton had said that, it would be a different story. If Nixon had said that, again, different story.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
I don't care if Saddam has ONE freaking gas or biological bomb. That's one too many.